Gario

OCR03809 - *YES* Darkwing Duck "Playtime's Over"

Recommended Posts

Hello, 
 
Here is new submission from me (PsyNES).

Contact Information

Submission Information

  • Name of game(s) arranged - Darkwing Duck NES
  • Name of arrangement - Playtime's Over
  • Name of individual song(s) arranged - Steel beak Stage
  • Additional information about game including composer, system, etc. (if it has not yet been added to the site) - none
  • Link to the original soundtrack (if it is not one of the sound archives already available on the site) - I think this is on your site already
  • Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc.
    Finally got some time/inspiration to do these submission emails again. This is already 3 years old ReMix, but I decided to try update it a little bit and submit.

    I started remixing this track because I liked the funkiness of the original, I thought I would try how it would sound as Psytrance'ish/Suomisaundi style ReMix.
    I think it turned really nice, funky suomisaundi stuff, I personally like it.
     

    This is made with Renoise as well as my all remixes and my own tracks, Renoise 4ever! :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, PsyNES is back! Man, that makes me a happy camper - I always loved his stuff.

This offering is no exception to that - the beat is bouncy and happy, pushing the relatively limited source hard. The overall textures are pretty busy, but I like busy textures so whatevs.

The arrangement does a lot with what it has, but after some time the overall arrangement starts to get stale. I can hear that things have been changed throughout to keep it somewhat interesting, but that bass line remains constant almost throughout, and the textures have small variations to them which doesn't quite alleviate the static nature of the arrangement. It's not deal-breaking for me, but I could see some on here feeling like the track gets tiring over nearly five minutes.

I still think this has a lot to offer, so I'd rather see it posted than not. Nice to see you back once again!

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Gario that this does get a little same-y after a while.  The textures are pretty static and the main hook repeats several times.  The soundscape is also heavily loaded toward the high end, and the combination of those two factors is slightly headache-inducing.

There is a lot of variation in there that's a lot of fun, and this is supposed to be psytrance-ish, which is static and repetitive by nature, but a good psytrance arrangement contains some element of progression or transformation as it goes.  This has a little bit of that, but it's still pretty fatiguing.

I'm going to come back to this one.  There's good stuff but I am literally getting a headache from it, so I'll give it another go with fresh ears later.

Edit: I'm back.  The repetitive, throbbing bass is still an issue, as is the repeated use the main hook (despite its melodic variations).  In addition, I'm finding it crowded in places, e.g. 0:09-0:24, in which I can barely hear the melody; the triangle wave is too quiet more often than not.

This is fun, but it needs more variation and range in the textures at least.  I think this would probably be fine with just that, since it would help the soundscape and the repetitiveness at the same time, but some other melodic twists would be welcome as well.

NO (resubmit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty much with Greg on this one. Really bouncy atmosphere, budding with energy, and lots of little variations give this track a lot of charm. My nitpick is the same that parts tend to get repetitive, and the bass is the biggest issue in my book. A changeup there would make a world of difference. That being said,I think the arrangement clears the bar as is, though I'm a bit borderline. 

If this comes back to you I hope you can change our some of that baseline and keep this fresh, otherwise good luck with the rest of the vote!

YES (borderline)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tempo increase right from the start definitely got my attention. The melody being buried during the intro seemed like maybe it would lead to it being more prominent later on, but that's not how it turned out; the track's just mixed in a way where the lead doesn't really occupy the foreground, and that needs to change or the track's going to remain sounding cluttered and unfocused. It wasn't until 1:54 where the melody was at least more prominent, and even then it was competing for space. MindWanderer also mentioned this as a problem, and to me it's ultimately a dealbreaker.

The other instrumentation was also piercing in places, but that wasn't a huge deal, so I'm not even going to timestamp anything.

The arrangement is golden, this would just need to be mixed in a way where you don't have the lead so low in volume relative to your supporting writing.

Around 3:35's section, the usage of the saw lead got stale, so I see what Gario was getting at in saying things felt repetitive; it didn't bother me as much, and I felt the dynamics of this were fine, but he did have a valid point to some degree.

IMO, Jari, all you really need to do is make sure the melody isn't buried and that the track is better mixed, and this would be good to go. Really nice base here, and good luck with the rest of the vote.

NO (resubmit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neat tempo shifting intro. The thing that struck me is that despite the amount of low end here, the bass has a lot of clarity. The synths are fairly standard fare, with not much in the way of innovative sounds. That said the chosen instruments work well together, creating a cohesive and complementary soundscape. Arrangement wise things feel good for the first 2 and a half minutes or so, but with not much in the way of a change in pace, things start to feel quite samey as we push forward into the second half. It's certainly noticeable, particularly when some fills and effects that were used earlier in the track are reused during the final third (or at least, sound similar enough to feel like they're reused). The mix really could have done with something in the arrangement to change things up, a breakdown perhaps, which could've utilised some of the intro's tempo switching to slow things down and build up again. As it stands, I would've ended things around the 3:30 mark. Clearly the lack of content to sustain duration is my main concern here, and seeing as the production is otherwise mostly decent, I don't feel this shortfall carries enough weight to hold this back for me. Let's see where this goes.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool dance track, definitely not psytrance.  The arrangement is incredibly full which is fine, but the mixing sinks it.  The bass is fatiguing which may be due to the timbre used, it has a lot of mids which is making the rest of the mids feel intensely crowded.  Find a way to clear up the mixing by replacing sounds or eqing or stereo widening so the mids aren't migraine-inducing.

NO (resubmit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, this OST is hawt.

Very cool intro sequence.  Balance sounds bass-heavy to me, but it didn't strike me as as much of an issue as it did some other judges.  This is mainly because it didn't seem to detract from the clarity of other elements.  Still, I'd personally drop it a dB or a few.  Lots of energy, but also some change-ups to give the listener a break.

Never a question for me as to what is being arranged here - riffs and cuts from the original are all over this.  I can agree a bit on cutting down on some of the repetition, but again, it didn't strike me as a dealbreaker.

I guess I can see both sides, but the issues weren't enough to bring it down for me.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Used to play this game a lot when I was a kid. This is pretty fantastic. This track really bumps. I thought the melody was getting a little lost in the beginning but it broke out so it's not an issue. Lots of small details; good attention paid to stuff like articulations. I don't agree with the "repetitive" points other Js are making. The structure here is pretty classic. I'm into this.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.